[ RadSafe ] News article from Belgium: Worker Critical afterhighradiation dose

Mon Apr 10 09:54:34 CDT 2006

Does anyone know if there is an English version of the write-up
Thanks
David    

David Villicana PMP
Monticello NGP
RP Sr Tech Inst
David.Villicana at nmcco.com
763-271-2610

-----Original Message-----
From: radsafe-bounces at radlab.nl [mailto:radsafe-bounces at radlab.nl] On Behalf Of Rainer.Facius at dlr.de
Sent: Friday, April 07, 2006 9:59 AM
To: Brent.Rogers at environment.nsw.gov.au; Jim_Hardeman at dnr.state.ga.us; radsafe at radlab.nl
Subject: AW: [ RadSafe ] News article from Belgium: Worker Critical afterhighradiation dose

Brent:

An official communiqué (http://www.irsn.org/vf/docs/fleurus.pdf <http://www.irsn.org/vf/docs/fleurus.pdf> ) leaves no room for doubting that the employee received - more or less - a full body dose of 4.2 Gy (uncertainty 3.8 to 4.5) within some 20 s. This source also describes the casualty as an experienced senior employee who was specifically called from home for helping the staff on site to turn off an alarm of unknown causation. The senior employee in full compliance with the safety regulations shortly inspected the irradiation room before locking up again its door to make sure that no person stayed inside. This short mandatory inspection led to his exposure.

What continues to amaze me is that at such high an exposure a particularly experienced radiation worker took three weeks to realize that he suffered from acute radiation thickness.

Presently he is receiving dedicated intensive professional care and hopefully he will recover and hopefully his significantly enhanced cancer risk does not materialize.

Rainer

________________________________

Von: Rogers Brent [mailto:Brent.Rogers at environment.nsw.gov.au]
Gesendet: Fr 07.04.2006 00:25
An: Facius, Rainer; Jim_Hardeman at dnr.state.ga.us; radsafe at radlab.nl
Betreff: RE: [ RadSafe ] News article from Belgium: Worker Critical after highradiation dose

Rainer:

I thought the same as you, that the effects didn't match the dose.  I
suppose it's possible that the annual limit that is referred to in the
article might be the general public annual limit of 1 mSv.  The article is
silent on the man's employment status, or whether he is occupationally
exposed.  He may well have been a janitor, visitor on a tour, or even a
company director.

In that case, his dose would be around 400 mSv, below the deterministic
threshold for hair-loss.

Either way, the numbers don't match, and I also got a chuckle reading that
this man in "very-serious" condition is at risk of developing cancer (aren't
we all?).  It would appear that the company director being quoted slept
through the acute/chronic exposure lecture.  

Brent Rogers
Manager Radiation Operations Unit
NSW Environment Protection Authority
Department of Environment and Conservation
*+61 2 9995 5986
*+61 2 9995 6603
* PO Box A290 Sydney South 1232

-----Original Message-----
From: Rainer.Facius at dlr.de [mailto:Rainer.Facius at dlr.de]
Sent: Friday, 7 April 2006 1:35 AM
To: Jim_Hardeman at dnr.state.ga.us; radsafe at radlab.nl
Subject: AW: [ RadSafe ] News article from Belgium: Worker Critical
after highradiation dose

Jim:

If the numbers quoted were correct than the worker would have received
400*20 mSv = 8 Sv effective dose. In this case he would have shown severe
symptoms of the prodromal syndrome within hours and not some minor effect
like hair loss after 3 weeks. That and the purported life-threatening
condition simply do not fit. A European radiation protection expert who
incidentally was visiting us today thinks that he remembers a dose of 2 Gy
which would be 100 times the annual limit. Of course at that acute dose a
significantly increased cancer risk is threatening this man but no immediate
early mortality risk - unless it interfered with other health conditions of
the worker. If it were not whole but partial body irradiation and the
multiple of 400 pertained to the limit for the corresponding tissue dose he
would at least have suffered from immediate and severe erythema. Again the
numbers presented simply don't match.

Regards, Rainer

Dr. Rainer Facius
German Aerospace Center
Institute of Aerospace Medicine
Linder Hoehe
51147 Koeln
GERMANY
Voice: +49 2203 601 3147 or 3150
FAX:   +49 2203 61970

-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
Von: radsafe-bounces at radlab.nl [mailto:radsafe-bounces at radlab.nl] Im Auftrag
von Jim Hardeman
Gesendet: Donnerstag, 6. April 2006 16:26
An: radsafe at radlab.nl
Betreff: [ RadSafe ] News article from Belgium: Worker Critical after
highradiation dose

Colleagues *

Does anybody have any additional information about this incident?

Jim Hardeman
Jim_Hardeman at dnr.state.ga.us

===========

URL =
http://www.expatica.com/source/site_article.asp?subchannel_id=24&story_id=29
065&name=Worker+critical+after+high+radiation+dose

Worker critical after high radiation dose
6 April 2006
BRUSSELS * A worker at a Wallonian company who was rushed to a Paris
hospital after being exposed to a high dose of radiation is in an acute,
life-threatening condition.
The Charleroi man, aged in his 50s, received within 20 seconds 400 times the
amount of radiation permitted in one year.
The incident dates back to 11 March and investigations are now being carried
out to determine why safety procedures failed.
The man spent 20 seconds in the radiation installation of the Wallonian firm
Sterigenics, a Fleurus-based company near Charleroi that sterilises medical
equipment.
Three weeks later, the worker reported to the company doctor because his
hair started falling out, newspaper 'Het Nieuwsblad' reported on Thursday. When doctors confirmed a high level of radiation in his body, the man was
rushed to a specialist Paris hospital.
Company director Patrick Gourmelon said on Wednesday the man is in a "very
serious" condition. The man is at risk of developing cancer and there are
limited medical treatments available.
Workers usually carry a radiation measuring device and investigations must
now determine why the worker or his supervisor did not immediately raise
alarm.
"Did the dosage meter not work, was it not examined or did the worker not
have it on" the chief of Belgian nuclear watchdog FANC-AFCN, Jean-Paul
Samain, said.

_______________________________________________
You are currently subscribed to the RadSafe mailing list

Before posting a message to RadSafe be sure to have read and understood the
RadSafe rules. These can be found at:
http://radlab.nl/radsafe/radsaferules.html

For information on how to subscribe or unsubscribe and other settings visit:
http://radlab.nl/radsafe/

_______________________________________________
You are currently subscribed to the RadSafe mailing list

Before posting a message to RadSafe be sure to have read and understood the
RadSafe rules. These can be found at:
http://radlab.nl/radsafe/radsaferules.html

For information on how to subscribe or unsubscribe and other settings visit:
http://radlab.nl/radsafe/

This email is intended for the addressee(s) named and may contain
confidential and/or privileged information.

If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender and then delete it immediately.  Any views expressed in this email are those of the individual sender except where the sender expressly and with authority states them to be the views of the Department of Environment and Conservation (NSW).

_______________________________________________
You are currently subscribed to the RadSafe mailing list

Before posting a message to RadSafe be sure to have read and understood the RadSafe rules. These can be found at: http://radlab.nl/radsafe/radsaferules.html

For information on how to subscribe or unsubscribe and other settings visit: http://radlab.nl/radsafe/